RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message


spence -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 3:25:27 PM)

quote:

The RAF didn't use the BAT. You're thinking of the Razon/Mezon bombs...



Maybe that is what of which I am thinking but what about the other questions?

1) USN 2E/4E training/operations against shipping versus USAAF training/operations against same.
2) Privateers
3) The Bat Bomb (as opposed to the bats with bombs).




spence -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 3:45:54 PM)

I saw somewhere that torpedos carried are tracked now at least as far as CV's are concerned. Are they in some fashion tracked for bases as well?




Yakface -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 4:35:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

How is air-recon being handled? Do the Allies still get the advantage of seeing what aircraft the Japanese have at a base whereas the Japanese only see what was there before the Allied order phase?


Not anymore. “Air balance” is limited to current player.


Hi Elf

Thanks for the answer, but it's not so much the air balance numbers that concern me, its these:




[image]local://upfiles/21862/61522FEF092C43CDA7F2B943390CFD8B.jpg[/image]



Because of the way detection levels work and because the Japanese see what is at the base before the Allies do their aircraft transfers, but the Allies see the numbers after the Japanese do their turn, it gives Player 2 an advantage.

For example - say the Japanese are reconning Changsha. The allies can still move in 100 bombers, (the Japanese player won't see them arrive) fly them on a mission immediately. The next turn the Japanese player sees them listed at Changsha, launches a misssion, but will bomb an empty base because the Allied player has transferred them away. If the situation is reversed, the Japanese player can not do the same thing. Instant CAP causes a similar problem - Allied player always knows how many fighters are at a base he is reconning, Japanese player can easily be caught out if the Allies suddenly transfer 100 fighters to a base. He just won't see them until the next turn.

In experienced hands, it is a very substantial advantage gained only because player 2 issues orders after player 1. With more Allied recon aircraft, it's a feature of the game that needs changing.



Sorry Yakface.

yes we are addressing this, though it is not an air team Item. I can't remember whihc team had the hammer on this.

Joe?


No problem - thanks for the answer. Would it be best to post the question in the general forum?




wworld7 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 4:41:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavey

Placekeeper for marking where I left off reading.


Hi,

Rather than fill up the forum with posts like yours above (I thought about doing this myself). Instead I created a Word Doc with the LAST post number I read.

Easy to find, and doesn't add to the the volume of posts.




jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 4:42:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface

How is air-recon being handled? Do the Allies still get the advantage of seeing what aircraft the Japanese have at a base whereas the Japanese only see what was there before the Allied order phase?


Not anymore. “Air balance” is limited to current player.


Hi Elf

Thanks for the answer, but it's not so much the air balance numbers that concern me, its these:




[image]local://upfiles/21862/61522FEF092C43CDA7F2B943390CFD8B.jpg[/image]



Because of the way detection levels work and because the Japanese see what is at the base before the Allies do their aircraft transfers, but the Allies see the numbers after the Japanese do their turn, it gives Player 2 an advantage.

For example - say the Japanese are reconning Changsha. The allies can still move in 100 bombers, (the Japanese player won't see them arrive) fly them on a mission immediately. The next turn the Japanese player sees them listed at Changsha, launches a misssion, but will bomb an empty base because the Allied player has transferred them away. If the situation is reversed, the Japanese player can not do the same thing. Instant CAP causes a similar problem - Allied player always knows how many fighters are at a base he is reconning, Japanese player can easily be caught out if the Allies suddenly transfer 100 fighters to a base. He just won't see them until the next turn.

In experienced hands, it is a very substantial advantage gained only because player 2 issues orders after player 1. With more Allied recon aircraft, it's a feature of the game that needs changing.



Sorry Yakface.

yes we are addressing this, though it is not an air team Item. I can't remember whihc team had the hammer on this.

Joe?



Uh, this would be assigned to the "Fog of War Team" [:D][:D][:D] hastily defined to be Michaelm and Joe !!! [:D][:D][:D]




Yakface -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 6:26:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


Uh, this would be assigned to the "Fog of War Team" [:D][:D][:D] hastily defined to be Michaelm and Joe !!! [:D][:D][:D]


Can't spot an FOW thread. If I sit and stare at the screen without blinking for 2 minutes will my DL go up enough to see it?




VSWG -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 6:30:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Knavey

Placekeeper for marking where I left off reading.


[image]http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/1043/witp20071209t44wv9.png[/image]

[;)]




Brady -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 6:55:31 PM)

TheElf-lol[:)]

...............

Ref-rotate piolets...very cool indead!


...............

1)  Were the relative gun values for aircraft looked at?

2)  Just how patrole planes be aloted search radar, given not all with a squadron were so equiped always.





jwilkerson -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:00:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface


quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson


Uh, this would be assigned to the "Fog of War Team" [:D][:D][:D] hastily defined to be Michaelm and Joe !!! [:D][:D][:D]


Can't spot an FOW thread. If I sit and stare at the screen without blinking for 2 minutes will my DL go up enough to see it?


The FOW thread is in the developers forum. [:)]




Woos -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:01:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: VSWG

[image]http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/1043/witp20071209t44wv9.png[/image]


Actually the pop-up is misleading. The forum designers took some short cuts. What the icon is really bringing you to is the first posting appearing after you logged out last time (or so). Simple to test. Log into the forum, don't read anything and log out again. After next login everything is marked read.

BTW, if you ever used UseNet and had a look at the .newsrc Files (which tend to grow dramatically over time) you understand why the forum does not track read progress in individual threads.




1EyedJacks -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:20:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

The question might be in game terms why would you want to, or care to, do you get some in game benifift from doing so?

In my game I will want to.

1. I want to preserve select High skill pilots
2. I want to build a buffer between my Training Schools and the fleet
3. More and higher EXP veterans in the Training Command pool will positively affect the EXP levels of newly trained replacements, and can ever so slightly increase production.
4. The Japanese contrary to popular opinion and however belatedly DID increase the intake of pilot training candidates through out the war. We intend to try and match this as accurately as possible. If game conditions (read into this how you will) allow it the IJ player will be able to fully train pilots after the historical decline of the aviation pipeline began

This is a feature, and is forces the Allied player the ATTRITE japanese planes on a large scale. If he does not do this he is making his own bed for 43', 44' and 45'...better get your favorite pillow.


Hi Elf,

Can I ask what will be important for skills along with EXP for a vetran in the Training Command Pool?

It sounds like I'd have several vetrans in the pool - one with high EXP for Low Level Bombing, one with high EXP in ASW etc. - right? But the vetran pilots also have skills like Naval, Air, Admin, Agression, etc. - right? Are any of the skill sets used for training "student pilots?" Would a vetran trainer with a higher Air skill be a better than a vetran trainer with a higher Admin skill (as an example)?

Also, would I be able to assign a HQ to the Training Command Pool to help increase the number and/or quality of the newly trained pilots?

And thanks again for taking the time to answer questions with this thread. It looks like a wave of excitement has washed over this forum with the AE announcement <laughter>.




Mike Solli -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:31:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

- The pilot pools needs to be separate for General Naval Aviation and Trained Carrier Pilots.
included


Did I just read this right? There is now a difference between IJNAF carrier trained pilots and IJNAF non-carrier trained pilots?

No there is no difference. We currently do not track individual pilots Carrier Quals.

It is tracked in the units.



So does this mean that if you pull a pilot from a non-carrier qualified unit, place him into the reserve pool and then place him into a carrier qualified unit, he's now carrier qualified? I guess it's the same as now?




Mike Solli -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:33:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

when in the TrainING pool, pilots are un-named, and un-designated. Generic if you will. Once they area drawn to an operational unit they are designated as TB, DB, FF, MB, REC etc. Once this happens they remain designated as a "Type" of pilot. And when they are moved from pool to pool they are in seperate pools based on their type.

The one exception is where they are in the Training Command pool as "instructors". Here is where they affect the output of "students" in the TrainING pool.


Very interesting. Once a pilot is designated by being assigned to an operational unit and then transferred to a pool, does the player know how many of each type of pilot is in that pool. Example: There are 20 pilots in the reserve pool. Will the player know that 12 are fighter, 3 TB, etc.?

How does a pilot become an instructor?

The player does not know how many of which type is in the pool.

Pilots become instructors when a player selects him and sends him to the Training Command pool.




Then what happens if the player tries to put a pilot into a certain unit and there are no pilots available for that unit type?

Thanks for the enlightenment on the instructor thing.




Mike Solli -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:34:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Does this mean that Japanese pilots will now rotate home to be instructors? Will the players be able to rotate pilots home to be instructors?


Not Automatically. Players will be given the option. IJN and IJAAF did rotate veterans back to the HIs to train new pilots but not approaching anywhere near the regularity or the numbers the US did.


Very cool. Thanks. [:)]




Mike Solli -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:36:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

The question might be in game terms why would you want to, or care to, do you get some in game benifift from doing so?

In my game I will want to.

1. I want to preserve select High skill pilots
2. I want to build a buffer between my Training Schools and the fleet
3. More and higher EXP veterans in the Training Command pool will positively affect the EXP levels of newly trained replacements, and can ever so slightly increase production.
4. The Japanese contrary to popular opinion and however belatedly DID increase the intake of pilot training candidates through out the war. We intend to try and match this as accurately as possible. If game conditions (read into this how you will) allow it the IJ player will be able to fully train pilots after the historical decline of the aviation pipeline began

This is a feature, and is forces the Allied player the ATTRITE japanese planes on a large scale. If he does not do this he is making his own bed for 43', 44' and 45'...better get your favorite pillow.


I like this a lot. I can see AFBs hating it even more.




Fletcher -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:43:33 PM)

Excuse me if you asked this question before...

Any skip-bombing improvement ? ... this tactic will be exclusive or bonused at 5th Air Force (Kenney´s)?

Excuse me for my poor english, it is not my native laguage.
Thanks in advance




timtom -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 7:50:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Elf -

The USN was prohibited (by interservice agreement) from possessing land based bombers (except seaplanes) prior to the war. Starting around the end of 1942 the USN started operating squadrons of patrol bombers of various types. Though much of the equipment was in pretty much the same as the USAAF equipment the training was quite different. The USN/USMC multi-engine bombers operated and attacked at low levels and were quite proficient at attacking ships/submarines. Basically though they did not make mass attacks on enemy fleets (though that may be a result of the IJN not presenting such targets). Previously you mentioned that low level naval attack proficiency would be mostly restricted to the USAAF 5th AF. I should hope that the USN 2E/4E bombers would also be given their due.



Though not addressed to me, I'm sure our pointy-eared friend wont mind. I believe what he was talking about was the attack bomber, ie a type of aircraft, as opposed to the low naval attack skill. It's possible to have one without the other. In OOB terms the arrival date of large number of units will use their formation date rather then the date of overseas deployment. This is in particularly the case with for the USN & USMC. In these cases it's down to the player to prioritise training of a particular skill.

quote:

ORIGINAL: spence

Is the PB4Y-2 Privateer included now? Is the BAT radar guided bomb? If so is it useable against land targets as well (apparently the RAF used it against bridges on the Burma railway somewhat successfully)?


Yes on the Privateer. No on the BAT I'm afraid. Would be cool, but it's the kind of thing where we have to weight the time needed for research, coding and testing against the potential gain given that reseources are finite.

As for individual aircraft types, I'd suggest that you all go away a count all the different aircraft types you think should be included and see how close to the 500+ number you get :D

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brady

2) Just how patrole planes be aloted search radar, given not all with a squadron were so equiped always.



A good question and one that's being chomping on. When we're through we'll let you know ;)





pad152 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 8:08:49 PM)

Will aircraft art be handled like ship art, were each plane has it's own bmp file?

This would make custom aircraft art a lot easier.






spence -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 8:18:08 PM)

quote:

A good question and one that's being chomping on. When we're through we'll let you know ;)



I know, I know...let it be. Just thought maybe a BAT bomb could be sort of an OHKA with a hard coded pilot skill of thus and so. It seems to me that OHKAs were finally made to work though I've never played any of the game in 1945 to know how it is that they do work. OOPs wrong question




Fishbed -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 8:39:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

I hear what you are saying Fishbed, but given that AE players will be starting from scratch, we priortized any adjustment to the Kamikaze routine to a later patch. AS it will likely not require any OoB work, and thus no restarts, we could code any changes at a later date. Bigger fish...

Thanks Elf :)




dwbradley -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 8:46:17 PM)

Have you given any thought to drawing 2 pilots from the pool for each 4E plane? This would go a long ways toward making the pain of losing one of these reflect the larger loss of life involved when one of these is lost. It might make WITP commanders more careful with these valuable assets, just as careful commanders in real life were.

In a related issue ( I know, wrong thread) the production cost of a large bomber should be more than the 4X a pursuit plane in WITP. In RL it was on the order of 8X-10X.

Thanks

Dave Bradley




Apollo11 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 8:58:59 PM)

Hi all,

I don't think this was asked before regarding upcoming WitP-AE...


Is there any modification to airbase overstacking rule?

Are there any modifications that differ 1-engine planes from 2-engine and 4-engine aircraft (all regarding stacking rules of airbases)?


Thanks in advance!


Leo "Apollo11"




Reiryc -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 9:27:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheElf

3. The TrainING Pool: This is the equivalent of the current Pilot pool where new recruits are being trained at varying schools. They are represented as in "classes" each class is at a different stage of training and thus has differing current EXP level. YOU MAY DRAW PILOTS TO COMBAT UNITS FROM THIS POOL. But you can imagine what that means...

Edit: Pilots in the TrainING pool are not named until they finish training or are drawn into an operational unit.


Since there is a training pool, does this mean that japanese pilot experience will no longer be dependent upon the year that they are drawn and instead is dependent upon length of time in training?




witpqs -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 9:30:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yakface
quote:

ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
Uh, this would be assigned to the "Fog of War Team" [:D][:D][:D] hastily defined to be Michaelm and Joe !!! [:D][:D][:D]

Can't spot an FOW thread. If I sit and stare at the screen without blinking for 2 minutes will my DL go up enough to see it?


The FOW thread is in the developers forum. [:)]


...Which we cannot see due to FOW! [:'(]




Terminus -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 9:57:07 PM)

Catch-22...




Speedysteve -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 10:18:01 PM)

Hi all,

Can't recall seeing this puppy in here.

Are there any tweaks to Minelaying missions in terms of whether CAP will be able to intercept them?




apbarog -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 11:37:20 PM)

In the upcoming Matrix game update "GG's Bombing the Reich", there is a thread for players to submit names to be used as filler pilots. Has this been considered for "AE"? Seems like a good way to pull in some new players (and sales) for a small amount of work. Of course, historical pilot names are preferred, but I would guess that there are many non-historical pilot names in the database.




Sardaukar -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 11:43:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: apbarog

In the upcoming Matrix game update "GG's Bombing the Reich", there is a thread for players to submit names to be used as filler pilots. Has this been considered for "AE"? Seems like a good way to pull in some new players (and sales) for a small amount of work. Of course, historical pilot names are preferred, but I would guess that there are many non-historical pilot names in the database.


That was done in War Plan Orange with ships. Lot of forum members gave their names to COs of many ships. I am the CO of BC Lion, for example [8D]. Also, lot of family members and Matrix staff appear as pilots or commanders in WitP too.




Brady -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/9/2007 11:58:34 PM)

Fletcher-You might be interested to know that the Japanese conducted skip bombing as well, the Japanese army even had boombs built just for that use.




wworld7 -> RE: Admiral's Edition Air War Thread (12/10/2007 12:28:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: apbarog

In the upcoming Matrix game update "GG's Bombing the Reich", there is a thread for players to submit names to be used as filler pilots. Has this been considered for "AE"? Seems like a good way to pull in some new players (and sales) for a small amount of work. Of course, historical pilot names are preferred, but I would guess that there are many non-historical pilot names in the database.


A decent idea as long as Capt. Flipper or his wingman Snoppy in their Sopwith Camel's never get shot down.

That would be like matter and anti-matter touching....POOF...the end of everything as we know it.




Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.953125